9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (1) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Sri Ram and Rs. 5,000/- on Shri Ratnasamy and another sum of Rs. 5,000/- on Shri Malaikutty, who are the partners of the above said firm. The demand is worked out as per the work sheet-I, which is attached in the impugned order. The demand pertains to the year 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87. 2. The learned Advocate, Shri Raghavan, appearing for the appellants, did not contest the demand of duty for the year 1984-85 and 1986-87, for the purpose of this proceeding. But as far as the demand of duty for the year 1985-86 is concerned, he stated that the invoice value of clearances effected through M/s. Devi Agencies are concerned, the department has quantified the same as Rs. 18,24,075.02. He stated that this confirmation for the year 1985-86 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the last sentence in para 25 of the impugned order, wherein, the adjudicating authority has held that unless and until it is shown that M/s. Devi Agencies had a different source of supply of Calcium Carbide other than M/s. Aarem Chemicals, the clearance of M/s. Devi Agencies will form a part of the value of clearances of M/s. Aarem Chemicals. 5. With respect to the imposition of penalty, he pointed out that each of the partners could be penalised under Rule 173Q and he drew our attention to the wordings of Rule 173Q. 6. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. In order to appreciate the arguments, we reproduce para 25 of the impugned order which reads as follows : 25. As regards the clearances effected by M/s Devi Age ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vi Agencies had no other source of supply of calcium carbide supplied from M/s. Aarem Chemicals. It is also not the case of the department in the show cause notice that M/s. Devi Agencies are producing the above goods in question. There is also no allegation in the impugned order that M/s. Devi Agencies are producing such goods. On the contrary, there is a finding that the only source is through which M/s. Devi Agencies were getting the goods is by receipt of the same from M/s. Aarem Chemicals. 8. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that adding the value of those goods which were supplied by M/s. Devi Agencies is not proper, in view of the fact that the very same goods which were supplied to them by M/s. Aarem Chemicals are sol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
